As the semester draws to a close I can't help but reflect on our class. When I signed on to the class I didn't really know what to expect. I needed one more communication credit and it seemed like an interesting topic... it was relevant to my life, I thought. Well, I was right! This was a challenging, fun and thought-provoking class that has direct relevance to my life now and in the future.
It helped me to really to understand how we use media and about the real digitial divide. This is not just a physical divide, but a social one.
I was also able to examine the role of new media in political discourse and life.
The Internet and new technologies has changed the way they operate. This has become very clear with the Obama campaign and administration.
I'd like to take a few moments to reflect on the way I live an eLife. Before I never gave it much thought and never really saw the negatives, but now I can weight both sides.
I have a Blackberry and I honestly can say I feel incomplete without it. I don't think that's good, but I need it to text, listen to messages, make phone calls, google, twitter, facebook, etc.
The smart phone keeps me connected to the world in a way a regular phone can only dream of.
I spend considerable time each week on my laptop many hours on the Internet.
These hours are spend working on homework, reading the news, googling, wikipediaing, youtubing, facebooking, shopping, planning trips, etc. I spend about 10-15 hours a week on the Internet. I think that's too much.
I probably have not spent a day without using a computer, Internet or Blackberry since... I don't know... maybe since late December.
I have become aware of all the privacy concerns we face as we basically publish our lives... googling your name can be telling as well. When doing so I not only find myself, but I find a famous sculpture and a fugitive.
Online identities will probably become more important as the Internet increasingly becomes more ubiquitous in our lives.
It will be fascinating to see how the Internet and technologies continue to evolve in the next ten and twenty years as we begin to have children ourselves.
How will technology shape their lives? How ubiquitous will it be? How will we protect their privacy?
These are the questions we need to address now!
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Obama Mashup Meets McCain Parody
The Obama Mash-Up
Mash-ups are fun to watch and they are all over the Internet, especially on YouTube. According to Wikipedia a video mashup is "a combination of mulitple sourcees of video--which usually have no relevance with each other." They're fun to watch because it combines random elements to create something that is usually hilarious. Sometimes it's as simple as taking different words to make a funny sentence.
There is a popular Obama mash-up all over the Internet that was quite popular during the election, but that continues to be watched.
It's a mash-up combining different Obama speeches to sing the lyrics to Kanye West's "Stronger."
It's an interesting parody that has had more that has been viewed almost 250,00 times. (There are some expletives... bleeped it... but not very well.)
This type of online creation engages constituents in an entirely new way that is only possible in today's electronic world.
The song presents a then presidential candidate in a way that is nothing but orthodox.
I'm also reminded about the "McCain Girls." It's widely known that Obama had an "Obama Girl" who was a young woman who created videos swooning over Obama.
The "McCain Girls" made a video where they sang "It's Raining Men" to new lyrics. They used their creativity to make their support of McCain widely known.
It raises the question. Are these zany methods more effective than traditional methods of campaigning for the individual. The masses can do great things, but sometimes as individuals we feel we can't make a great contribution. Is it possible that creating "viral videos" such as these ones we can support our candidates and our ideas in a more effective ways.
"It's Raining McCain" video has more than TWO MILLION VIEWS!
Mash-ups are fun to watch and they are all over the Internet, especially on YouTube. According to Wikipedia a video mashup is "a combination of mulitple sourcees of video--which usually have no relevance with each other." They're fun to watch because it combines random elements to create something that is usually hilarious. Sometimes it's as simple as taking different words to make a funny sentence.
There is a popular Obama mash-up all over the Internet that was quite popular during the election, but that continues to be watched.
It's a mash-up combining different Obama speeches to sing the lyrics to Kanye West's "Stronger."
It's an interesting parody that has had more that has been viewed almost 250,00 times. (There are some expletives... bleeped it... but not very well.)
This type of online creation engages constituents in an entirely new way that is only possible in today's electronic world.
The song presents a then presidential candidate in a way that is nothing but orthodox.
I'm also reminded about the "McCain Girls." It's widely known that Obama had an "Obama Girl" who was a young woman who created videos swooning over Obama.
The "McCain Girls" made a video where they sang "It's Raining Men" to new lyrics. They used their creativity to make their support of McCain widely known.
It raises the question. Are these zany methods more effective than traditional methods of campaigning for the individual. The masses can do great things, but sometimes as individuals we feel we can't make a great contribution. Is it possible that creating "viral videos" such as these ones we can support our candidates and our ideas in a more effective ways.
"It's Raining McCain" video has more than TWO MILLION VIEWS!
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Dangers of Twitter--Can we internalize the News? Politics or Otherwise
Twitter has its dangers and its not just privacy concerns. Scientists at USC are finding that fast news bulletins with only 140 characters or less is not an effective way for people to fully understand the news. The AP wire-style tweet is just too short for people to process... especially young people. The research suggest that it can affect young people's "moral compass" because human suffering becomes commonplace, numeric and unreal. The readers of the tweets do not delve into the true repercussions of tragedy and thus can become immune to feeling other's suffering.
If this is true... and it makes some sense... it's an important wake-up call. Twitter can be a great way to interact with friends in a new way, follow
celebrities, make online friends and keep up with the news, but it can also backfire!
It backfires because we do not internalize the information.
So I ask this question: does this also affect our reaction to political stories?
Does it make us less likely to want to become involved in the political process?
Constant updates on politics might not faze the political news junkie, but might quickly make others disenchanted. Can the news overexpose itself? Just like celebrities can? It's an interesting proposition. Perhaps, too much information is just that--too much information. Maybe informing followers of twitter feeds too much information and minutae is a terrible idea.
It takes me back to the presidential election coverage. It went on forever and ever on cable news networks for more than one year. Coverage was nonstop, around the clock from every single angle imaginable. Again, the political news junkies thrived on it, but many people were clear that they had their fill and were just not paying attention anymore.
Could such an invasive platform like news updates on Twitter make the situation worse?
It's an interesting thought and one we should pay attention to.
Read about the study here.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/mentalhealth/04/14/twitter.study/index.html?eref=rss_latest
If this is true... and it makes some sense... it's an important wake-up call. Twitter can be a great way to interact with friends in a new way, follow
celebrities, make online friends and keep up with the news, but it can also backfire!
It backfires because we do not internalize the information.
So I ask this question: does this also affect our reaction to political stories?
Does it make us less likely to want to become involved in the political process?
Constant updates on politics might not faze the political news junkie, but might quickly make others disenchanted. Can the news overexpose itself? Just like celebrities can? It's an interesting proposition. Perhaps, too much information is just that--too much information. Maybe informing followers of twitter feeds too much information and minutae is a terrible idea.
It takes me back to the presidential election coverage. It went on forever and ever on cable news networks for more than one year. Coverage was nonstop, around the clock from every single angle imaginable. Again, the political news junkies thrived on it, but many people were clear that they had their fill and were just not paying attention anymore.
Could such an invasive platform like news updates on Twitter make the situation worse?
It's an interesting thought and one we should pay attention to.
Read about the study here.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/mentalhealth/04/14/twitter.study/index.html?eref=rss_latest
Twitter Comes of Age--it's effect in political news coverage
Twitter... Twitter... Twitter! It's even more in the media than the last time I wrote a blog post about it. I think it's a fascinating phenomenon to be honest and have two blog entries about it.
Just a few days ago, Ashton Kutcher realized that he almost had as many Twitter followers as CNN Breaking News! Kutcher, @aplusk, had more trhan 800,000 followers and was trailing CNN by thousands of followers. He decided that it was pretty awesome he was the 3rd most followed on Twitter, after CNN and Britney Spears, and so he came up with a challenge!
Ashton asked his fans and the world wide web to follow him on Twitter so that he could reach 1,000,000 followers before CNN did. No one had that many followers. He posted a video on the Internet and made it clear he was serious about it.
CNN was quick to respond with CNN's Rick Sanchez addressing the challenge mocking Kutcher's notion and Larry King making a funny video telling Kutcher not to feel bad, but there was no way one man could stand up to a "gorge network."
Well, the man, albeit a famous one prevailed!
The news has been all a twitter the last couple of days and Asthon Kitcher and P. Diddy (Puff Daddy, Sean Combs, etc.), an other avid twitterer, appeared on Larry King Live to talk about the shift.
There has been a shift! How great? I don't know, but there has been a shift.
Traditional media is important, very important, but the times are changing and some people, many people want to also get Ashton Kutcher's insights and muses on life and the news. Granted, he's not a trained journalist, but most people realize that... they just want fresh perspectives.
There has been so much talk about twitter later that the queen of talk, Oprah Winfrey, decided to jump aboard with her own account, @oprah. Already, she has amassed hundreds of thousands of followers, with more than 35,000 in the first day.
This will impact the way many people get their news. People and with the way trends works, and more people will follow the early adopters,twitter will become a more important social networking site and source of information. People will get news updates on their smart phones and get snippets of information that will shape their view of the news.
They will not only get news bulletins from news organizations, but opinion and reaction to the news from celebrities, opinion columnists, bloggers and their own friends.
It's a true shift... it begins a conversation. There is a danger in this though and that's what the next blog post will address.
What say you? Is this really a shift? Or am I giving Ashton Kutcher to much credit for his shtick? He did say he would donate 10,000 nets to prevent malaria in Africa--that's a good thing either way!
Just a few days ago, Ashton Kutcher realized that he almost had as many Twitter followers as CNN Breaking News! Kutcher, @aplusk, had more trhan 800,000 followers and was trailing CNN by thousands of followers. He decided that it was pretty awesome he was the 3rd most followed on Twitter, after CNN and Britney Spears, and so he came up with a challenge!
Ashton asked his fans and the world wide web to follow him on Twitter so that he could reach 1,000,000 followers before CNN did. No one had that many followers. He posted a video on the Internet and made it clear he was serious about it.
CNN was quick to respond with CNN's Rick Sanchez addressing the challenge mocking Kutcher's notion and Larry King making a funny video telling Kutcher not to feel bad, but there was no way one man could stand up to a "gorge network."
Well, the man, albeit a famous one prevailed!
The news has been all a twitter the last couple of days and Asthon Kitcher and P. Diddy (Puff Daddy, Sean Combs, etc.), an other avid twitterer, appeared on Larry King Live to talk about the shift.
There has been a shift! How great? I don't know, but there has been a shift.
Traditional media is important, very important, but the times are changing and some people, many people want to also get Ashton Kutcher's insights and muses on life and the news. Granted, he's not a trained journalist, but most people realize that... they just want fresh perspectives.
There has been so much talk about twitter later that the queen of talk, Oprah Winfrey, decided to jump aboard with her own account, @oprah. Already, she has amassed hundreds of thousands of followers, with more than 35,000 in the first day.
This will impact the way many people get their news. People and with the way trends works, and more people will follow the early adopters,twitter will become a more important social networking site and source of information. People will get news updates on their smart phones and get snippets of information that will shape their view of the news.
They will not only get news bulletins from news organizations, but opinion and reaction to the news from celebrities, opinion columnists, bloggers and their own friends.
It's a true shift... it begins a conversation. There is a danger in this though and that's what the next blog post will address.
What say you? Is this really a shift? Or am I giving Ashton Kutcher to much credit for his shtick? He did say he would donate 10,000 nets to prevent malaria in Africa--that's a good thing either way!
Monday, April 6, 2009
The Online Town Hall
President Barack Obama has become the poster boy for the town hall both online and off, but it's interesting if we look back months before the November election Sen. John McCain challenged Pres. Obama to 10 town halls. Pres. Obama declined to holding so many town hall meetings.
Well, now that's in the past and Pres. Obama has traveled back and forth all over the country and recently holding a town hall overseas during his European tour. Most importantly, he recently held an online press conference where everyday Americans could send in questions for him to answer. The event was a historic first and perhaps one of the most talked about questions was one centered on the legalization of marijuana, to which Pres. Obama answered with a resounding "no."
This love affair with new, web 2.0 interactions is not new to his presidenccy, but was already commonplace during the election with the web sites the Obama campaign, as previously stated, but also with events such as the CNN YouTube debates where candidates, both Republican and Democrat participated.
The event took the ability of candidates to communicate for free with the American public and reversed it. Americans were then able to ask their questions to the different candidates and have them played during the debate. Some criticized this event as trivializing the importance of a presidential debate while others saw it as the natural move forward from FDR's fireside radio chats and the JFK/Nixon presidential debates, the first televised presidential debate.
Whether some believe the YouTube debates were democratizing or trivializing is beside the point. Events like the two YouTube debates paved the way for events such as the recent Obama online Press Conference.
Thousands of people send in their videos and in the end only half a dozen or so are answered, and how they are selected is subject for an entirely different blog post, but it truly is change from things as usual, from the status quo.
It is my humble opinion that any venue that can make the people participate more in this participatory democracy is advantageous. Videos can even become viral ads that with little money can reach many people and influence opinion. There may be glitches with them, but they are ways that bring many more people, providing they have access to technology, closer to power. It can be a new forum for keeping our leaders accountable.
Some Readings:
Videos Online
The YouTube election
Some Videos:
Republican CNN YouTube Debate Highlights
Democrat CNN YouTube Debate Highlights
Well, now that's in the past and Pres. Obama has traveled back and forth all over the country and recently holding a town hall overseas during his European tour. Most importantly, he recently held an online press conference where everyday Americans could send in questions for him to answer. The event was a historic first and perhaps one of the most talked about questions was one centered on the legalization of marijuana, to which Pres. Obama answered with a resounding "no."
This love affair with new, web 2.0 interactions is not new to his presidenccy, but was already commonplace during the election with the web sites the Obama campaign, as previously stated, but also with events such as the CNN YouTube debates where candidates, both Republican and Democrat participated.
The event took the ability of candidates to communicate for free with the American public and reversed it. Americans were then able to ask their questions to the different candidates and have them played during the debate. Some criticized this event as trivializing the importance of a presidential debate while others saw it as the natural move forward from FDR's fireside radio chats and the JFK/Nixon presidential debates, the first televised presidential debate.
Whether some believe the YouTube debates were democratizing or trivializing is beside the point. Events like the two YouTube debates paved the way for events such as the recent Obama online Press Conference.
Thousands of people send in their videos and in the end only half a dozen or so are answered, and how they are selected is subject for an entirely different blog post, but it truly is change from things as usual, from the status quo.
It is my humble opinion that any venue that can make the people participate more in this participatory democracy is advantageous. Videos can even become viral ads that with little money can reach many people and influence opinion. There may be glitches with them, but they are ways that bring many more people, providing they have access to technology, closer to power. It can be a new forum for keeping our leaders accountable.
Some Readings:
Videos Online
The YouTube election
Some Videos:
Republican CNN YouTube Debate Highlights
Democrat CNN YouTube Debate Highlights
Social Networking as Political Capital: Privacy of Supporters At Stake
It is now common knowledge that Barack Obama's win last November had a great deal to do with his ability to use the Internet and Web 2.0 social networking sites. Pres. Obama was everywhere on the Internet from Facebook to YouTube to Black Planet and Asian Ave.
Pres. Obama was able to create a simple yet powerful fund raising machine while at the same time creating a brand in a whole new way.
Marketing today including the campaigning of a candidate to the American people is all about branding. Our names are brands and Pres. Obama understood this from the get go. Without necessarily having more money on the coffers he was able to generate the buzz and connect with supporters all across the country with the Internet.
The Republicans were unable to hone in the Internet's Web 2.0 applications in quite the same way and it can be argued that was one of the major reasons for their demise... of course the state of the economy and the war being blamed on Bush and the Republicans had something to do with that. One Republican who was able to use Web 2.0 and continues to do so, is Sen. John McCain's daughter, Megan McCain who maintains her own blog at McCain Blogette
Megan McCain says that the Republicans did not understand the Internet in quite the same way. They knew it was a fund raising tool, but did not realize its full potential as a way to campaign. They knew they needed to have an Internet presence, but not to what point. President Obama's youth, as the "first post-boomer candidate" for the U.S. presidency played an important part, as suggested in a New York Times article.
Those who followed Barack Obama on Twitter and were his fan on Facebook or watched his YouTube videos feel personally invested in the political process probably as much as those who canvassed and knocked on doors around the country. Many young Americans will expect that this interactive, two-way street will continue into his presidency and not end now during his first months as president.
It's fair to assume that most Internet, Web 2.0 friends of Barack Obama did not join these social networks because of him, but were already on them and decided to join him. What many of these people may not know is that following him, be it good or bad, creates an online identity for them. They may be independents, but are instantly branded as Democrats, they might agree with some of his ideas, but now seem like they agree with all of them--but most importantly, online advertisers track this information.
Through cookies and such, advertisers use this information to place ads on Facebook or other websites these people frequent. If their political ideologies are best kept private they suddenly are not and any photos they post up about the campaign or otherwise are no longer their property. These things may not be a major issue to most people, but are facts that people should know nonetheless.
Here's an interesting video we talked about in our class.
Do You Have a Facebook? ... talks about online privacy facts.
Social networking is a powerful tool to create a political brand, win a campaign, and interact with the electorate, but the online friends may not always benefit. With that said, candidates also need to make sure they are not overexposing themselves and becoming irrelevant in a short period of time.
Finally, here's a quick video on a NYU student who organized about 150 students for Obama through Facebook.
Monday, March 30, 2009
The Twitter Revolution
Twitter... Twitter... Twitter.
A word I've heard often in the last year or so... Rick Sanchez and Don Lemon both "twitter" on their CNN newscasts. Celebrities have been twittering for a while also letting the whole world now about all the minutiae in their lives. It's even said that Jennifer Aniston became annoyed with boyfriend's John Mayer's Twitter "addiction
Well, after hearing so much about Twitter and the media and from tech-savvy friends I decided to jump aboard several weeks ago.
It's an interesting proposition... think text message meets blog... you got 140 characters to share an idea and express to all your followers... aka Twitter friends who sign up to read all your updates.
It's so interesting, that some British school officials are considering teaching students not only about the Bard upon Avon, but also about Twitter devotees such as Ashton Kutcher.
At the moment friends who have Twitter are following me as are an interesting array of people in the U.S. and around the world who I do not know, but am "getting to know" maybe.
Some say Twitter has reached its peak, jumped the shark while other say the Twitter Revolution is very beginning. I tend to agree with the latter.
On my Blackberry, thanks to Twitterberry, I get to read all my friends updates. But I only get to follow my real-life friends, but journalists, bloggers and news organizations. I get updates from them giving me fascinating links or updating me on the latest story. It's like I'm in a newsroom with the AP wire going crazy, but in a whole new way.
That's why I say this is a revolution. You can receive media in a whole new way and that's exactly what living the "eLife" is all about! I look at my phone and know what just happened in places that are important to me... say CNN for world news, Salt Lake Tribune for Utah News, New York Times, for my "hometown's" news... big hometown i know... Le Monde, for French news (J'aime la France) or Colombia's El Tiempo, to know what's happening where my grandparents live.
I get links and then I can retweet them... RT... basically I can share what I got from one of my friends with my followers. I can also interact with them and they can read what I have to say on the subject. If they're real-life friends they'll read it and if they have thousands of followers they might not get to read it, but then again they might.
On CNN for example, during Sanchez's and Lemon's show many of the Twitter comments are actually read on the air!
It's changing news media in an incredible way where there is much more transparency and interaction.
It's fascinating and it's another example of social determinism. For those who choose to follow this new form of media and social networking they can be on top of things and be informed. It's using the internet and new technologies to our advantage.
So... follow me @edgarzuniga
For those who don't know Twitter speak that would be... create an account @ twitter.com and then follow me @ twitter.com/edgarzuniga
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
